Graduate Quantum theory without classical time: quantum gravity and unification

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a paper proposing a new Theory of Everything that derives key concepts such as 4D spacetime, quantum physics, and gravitation from first principles, specifically through Trace Dynamics and octonionic space. The author expresses intrigue over the paper's approach, particularly its logical derivation of the fine structure constant, which appears to be highly accurate. There is a request for feedback on the feasibility and credibility of this line of investigation, especially regarding the incorporation of Division Algebras. The author acknowledges their lack of expertise but is eager for insights from knowledgeable contributors. Overall, the paper's claims have sparked interest and debate regarding its implications for unifying quantum theory and gravity.
the_pulp
Messages
206
Reaction score
9
TL;DR
This paper looks as a new Theory of Everything that from first principles (Trace Dynamics, Division Algebras, ...) seems to derive a lot of things (4D Spacetime, Quantum Mechanics, Standard Model, ...)
It came to my attention yesterday this, from my ignorant point of view, amazing paper that describes what it looks as another Theory of Everything: https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.02062

If I didnt understand incorrectly, from first principles / a pre quantum theory (Trace Dynamics, 8D octonionic Space, ...) it derives:
1) 4D Spacetime
2) Quantum Physics
3) Gravitation / Metric Tensor /...
4) Standard Model with its 3 generations
5) Many of its numerical parameters

I am not a proffesional in the subject at all so, as a consequence, I would highly appreciate any comment regarding this paper. Is my understanding correct? Does it look feasible? As a consequence of your understanding of this paper, do you give any credit to this line of investigation? Ps: I am always easily seduced by papers that tries to incorporate Division Algebras in First Principles so, as this paper claims to do it successfully, that's why it caught my attention,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm intrigued by this paper also. I haven't begun to grasp most of it, but I kind of "sat up and took notice" when I saw what seemed like a simple, logical derivation of the fine structure constant that is accurate to ~ 1 part in 10^5:
\alpha = \exp((\frac{1}{3} - \sqrt{\frac{3}{8}})\frac{2}{3})\frac{9}{1024} = 0.00729713.
I'm not sure if there is something there, or if it is just numerology. I would love to hear what @john baez thinks.
 
This is an alert about a claim regarding the standard model, that got a burst of attention in the past two weeks. The original paper came out last year: "The electroweak η_W meson" by Gia Dvali, Archil Kobakhidze, Otari Sakhelashvili (2024) The recent follow-up and other responses are "η_W-meson from topological properties of the electroweak vacuum" by Dvali et al "Hiding in Plain Sight, the electroweak η_W" by Giacomo Cacciapaglia, Francesco Sannino, Jessica Turner "Astrophysical...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
15K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K